- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 01:13:55 +0100
- To: "gareth edison" <gareth.edison@googlemail.com>, w3c-translators@w3.org
On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:19:00 +0100, gareth edison
<gareth.edison@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I would just like to reply on some of the remarks made by Charles
>
>> > I fail to grasp the importancy of translating documents into languages
>> > like Turmen, Uzbek, Azerbajan, Kazakh, Belarussian, Ukrainian, >
>> Estonian, Latvian, Tatar, Georgian or even Armenian.
>>
>> Well, if you happen to speak such a language, which quite a lot of
>> people
>> do, then it is helpful to find documents in that language.*
> In this case I m sure it will not bother you if I propose to translate
> some of the documents into the following Irish dialects: Caighdeán
> Oifigiúil, Gaeilge Bhleá Cliath and Caighdeán Oifigiúil as well as
> Welsh Cymraeg ( I am Welsh ) and maybe when Im finnished I may
> dabble in the Scottish Gàidhlig
No, it doesn't bother me in the least. Since Irish has status as an
official language of a real country, and since both it and Cymraeg are
taught in schools, it would be great to have more resources available in
those languages. I am sorry that Opera does not have a current translation
into them (lack of resources, and no known volunteers)...
> This brings me once again to the whole point of my first post, and I
> repeat:
>
> Who is going to proof read all these translations in able to uphold the
> high standards required for an online translation of a W3C document ?
> Who is going to proof read Turmen, Uzbek, Azerbajan, Kazakh, Tatar and
> the likes ?
And my response was in two parts. The first point is that there is no
"high standard required" - even the original documents are sometimes badly
written (I say that as a someone who has been personally responsible for
the exact wording of text in some sections of W3C recommendations that
have managed to cause confusion running for *years*). The more people who
look at a document the better.
The second point was, as Ivan also suggested, that people who are
interested in the documents can do this - and from time to time already do.
> *> Wouldnt it be much wiser to allow ONLY *native speakers* to translate
>> > documents for W3C instead of people producing translations
>> > which they cant read themselves?
>>
>> Not really, in my opinion. [...]
>
>
> Firstly it seems that W3C made similar proposals and I quote:
>
> "I think we should inquire of translators whether they are native
> speakers, and even prefer them to be in-country, and only go with
> people who aren't when there are unusual circumstances."
This is a suggestion from an individual, who is not the person responsible
for Translations. It is an interesting suggestion, but I think it is
wrong, which is why I said so.
> On this note it wont harm if I ask my next door neighbour to translate a
> W3C document into Kalaallisut. He is a fisherman but I am sure he will
> make his way thought he translation ;-)
If he is indeed willing to volunteer his time to do so then I doubt it
does any harm and may even help some other people, although if he has to
learn the language first it is likely to take some time. But even
fishermen have to have some kind of pastime, and learning languages is
more or less never a bad thing. (Or does he happen to speak Kalaallisut
already?)
Seriously, I am a native english speaker, although I am based between two
countries where english is not an official language. I have written
articles, documents, and so on in both french and spanish (as the original
language of composition), and some of these, and translations by me, are
on the W3C website. I am not the greatest translator, but I am not
terrible either, and if I happen to have the time then I can make a
translation that is useful enough for people to either read or criticise
and help improve.
For a spanish speaker who reads english fluently, my translations are not
that good. But for spanish speakers who do not, I have seven years of
experience explaining W3C specifications (for the first half in pretty
poor-quality spanish) and a track record of seeing the explanations lead
to a better understanding than they had achieved through their efforts at
trying to understand the original.
This applies also (again, in my personal practical experience over the
last seven years) to French and Italian, although I have spent less time
working in those two languages on W3C-related stuff.
In all three example languages there are large active communities where it
is easy enough to see how this works by participating for a while. But
there is also a community that was set up at my instigation who is working
in finnish and its dialects on accessibility. Finnish is, in global terms,
a tiny language spoken mostly by people who are also considered
universally functionally literate in english. And yet initial reports
(this was seven and a half years ago, and I haven't followed up) were that
this turned out to be more useful than the people involved in it had
expected.
The example you give is a little facetious, but one of the ways that a
group of people can better understand a document is by translating it and
working with the translations as well as the original.
As chair of a W3C workng group, against W3C preferred policy, I actively
seek translations of working drafts (and in some cases participate in
producing them) because it helps get feedback from a community who could
not otherwise participate meaningfully in the development of the
specification, and because it helps find parts of the draft that are not
as clear as we would like. Generally the translations of drafts are
somewhat slap-dash (as are the some of the drafts themselves) but my
experience is that even when these translations are done in a rush by
someone only moderately competent working over a machine translation it
still proves useful to pretty much all concerned.
[...]
> I dont have a degree in linguistics nor do I speak Welsh.
Nor do I. I do have a reasonably large amount of experience working with
multilingual and with non-english-speaking communities, and some with
non-english-speaking communities based in english-speaking countries. For
example, although I speak none of the north-eastern Arnhem Land
Yolngu-matha group of languages, and many of the 10,000 speakers of them
(there are about 30 languages in the group, and most speakers can speak
about half-a-dozen if they speak any) speak little english,
> It was also never my intent
> to offend anyone at anytime. So I apologize if I did offend anyone.
It doesn't seem that anyone took offence, which is a good sign that this
list does indeed cherish the freedom to speak up. You should be aware that
language is a touchy subject for many people (a little like religion), so
it would probably pay to check basic statements carefully.
I also don't intend to offend you (or anyone else) and hope that my
comments are taken as an attempt at positive contribution in good faith...
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2008 00:13:42 UTC